peelfandomcom-20200213-history
Forum:Timings on track listings
Thanks for your reply, Steve. While we're about it, I would also debate the inclusion of timings in the listings. *1) We're not certain that the tapes all run at the correct speed, so this could be misleading when it comes to identifying tracks. I don't think it really helps anybody. *2) It creates unnecessary extra work for the lister, time spent when they could be making new lists. *3) As you pointed out, despite all our efforts, we only have 200+ track lists for thousands of possible dates, and a myriad of artist links to pages that don't exist yet. Time would be better spent adding to those too. *4) Finally, many shows contain edits imposed by either the original taper editing out tracks that they didn't like or didn't have room on the tape for, or for tape flips. *So, I recommend we stick to the artist/track/source/label format from now on, in this way: *Double square brackets round the srtist name-comma-open single quotation mark-title-open bracket-source-close bracket-close quotation mark-open bracket-label-close quotation mark. This aids clarity, and is the system the BBC use on their site, and the one I have adopted. Thoughts, anyone? *Steve (Teenage Kicks) Hi Steve, Just a few thoughts on this. 1. I don't really like timings either and see your point completely, but I don't really mind if a few pages have them. I agree with you that it's good not to have things that draw the eye away from the basic tracklistings (which is why I had the comments section separate at the top). 2. I'm absolutely in favor of a basic artist/track/source/label format as well. In fact, for me, the more basic the better. On the other hand, these things evolve as time goes on and I'd like to see how things shape up over a period before we start imposing too much of a straitjacket. I think it might be a bit discouraging for people to put time into doing a tracklisting and then find their stuff getting edited on small points. At this stage, perhaps the priority should be encouraging people to join in rather than worrying too much about style things. We can always go back and sort everything out once a big chunk of the basic info is there. I'd prefer to keep the editing to a minimum on our part (too time-consuming for one thing, and it's easy to miss stuff, so it's never perfect anyway). 3. I've noticed you move towards a BBC style and that's fine by me if you want to do that. I thought ours should look a little different if possible, with simplicity the key (to encourage people again). Tricky of course if you're presenting the same basic info as the BBC (once we hit 2001). We don't want to get accused of just pasting across their stuff (obviously we're not, but I really don't want to have to deal with the BBC). 4. Seems to me that the initial style here (of say the first 400 Box tape) saves two single quote marks and a set of brackets over your proposed BBC style one. Also, looking at a few of theirs, seems to me they use a dash rather than a comma after the artist name as you've had it. I've been using a colon, which I think gives a good break (and is different to BBC style). Again, I'm fine with a bit of variation. Uh, that's about it. I want to drop you an email at some point today on another thing, but need to crack on with a bit of work right now. Cheers, Steve W 02:13, 11 November 2008 (UTC)